Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1975–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Camarena v. Texas Employment Commissiongreen1 sentence2024Comm’n., 754 S.W.2d 149, 151 (Tex. 1988) (even though the injunction was rendered moot, attorney’s fee issue was an integral part of the claim and breathed life into the appeal). | 1 | 1 |
Townsend v. Stategreen1 sentence1998Therefore, had the complained-of testimony been offered after Dr. Cox testified, it would have been admissible under rule 403 to rebut his testimony. 7 Tex.R.Crim.Evid. 404(a)(1); Townsend v. State, 776 S.W.2d 316, 318 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1989, pet. ref'd). | 1 | 1 |
Dinkins v. Stategreen2 sentences1996Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 344-45 (Tex.Cr.App.1995). 1996Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 345 (Tex.Cr.App.1995), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995). | 1 | 1 |
McCarter v. Stategreen2 sentences1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478, 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). 1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478 , 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). | 1 | 1 |
Graham v. Stategreen2 sentences1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478, 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). 1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478 , 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). | 1 | 1 |
Naugle v. Stategreen2 sentences1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478, 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). 1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478, 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte McKaygreen2 sentences1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478, 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). 1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478 , 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). | 1 | 1 |
Gardner v. Stategreen2 sentences1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478, 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). 1995McCarter v. State, 837 S.W.2d 117, 120 (Tex.Cr.App.1992); Ex parte McKay, 819 S.W.2d 478 , 482 (Tex.Cr.App.1990); Gardner v. State, 730 S.W.2d 675, 689 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987); Graham v. State, 566 S.W.2d 941, 953 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); and, Naugle v. State, 118 Tex.Crim. 566 , 40 S.W.2d 92, 94 (App.1931). | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Central Texas MHMR Centergreen1 sentence1992See Robinson, 780 S.W.2d at 171 , and Hitchcock v. Garvin, 738 S.W.2d 34, 36-38 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1987, no writ) (negligent failure to use or operate the warning lights on a vehicle may subject the State to liability under the negligent operation and use of a motor vehicle clause of section 101.021). | 1 | 1 |
Hitchcock v. Garvingreen1 sentence1992See Robinson, 780 S.W.2d at 171 , and Hitchcock v. Garvin, 738 S.W.2d 34, 36-38 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1987, no writ) (negligent failure to use or operate the warning lights on a vehicle may subject the State to liability under the negligent operation and use of a motor vehicle clause of section 101.021). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Speer v. Presbyterian Children's Home & Service Agency
green
1 sentence2024We agree with Zubarik that Speer v. Presbyterian Children’s Home & Service Agency, 847 S.W.2d 227 (Tex. 1993), a case relied upon by appellants, is procedurally distinguishable. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Davis v. State
green
1 sentence2023Clifton argues that “the judicial power exercised by district courts includes the power to ‘hear’ cases.” He posits that because an “elected district judge presides over the district court[,] it is the district judge who ‘hears’ cases over which the district court has jurisdiction.” He argues that because conducting voir dire is an integral part of hearing a case, “only district judges may hear cases.” Clifton thus concludes that “associate judges may not conduct voir dire” and a “conviction arising from any jury trial in which voir dire was conducted by an associate judge is void.” Citing to | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Elchehimi v. Nationwide Insurance Co.
neutral
2 sentences2008The dissent argues we should follow the court of appeals' suggestion that Texas adopt an integral part test to determine whether actual physical contact occurred. 183 S.W.3d at 835 . 2008The dissent argues we should follow the court of appeals’ suggestion that Texas adopt an integral part test to determine whether actual physical contact occurred. 183 S.W.3d at 835 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lydon v. Malme
green
2 sentences1996Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 345 (Tex.Cr.App.1995), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995). 1996Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 345 (Tex.Cr.App.1995), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Spinner v. County of Los Angeles
green
2 sentences1996Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 345 (Tex.Cr.App.1995), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995). 1996Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 345 (Tex.Cr.App.1995), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Farrell v. Hunt
green
1 sentence1993Id. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Rough v. SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
green
1 sentence1975The facts of this case present an entirely different situation than that evidenced in Rough v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 426 S.W.2d 579 (Tex.Civ.App.—Dallas 1968, writ ref.). | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.